Interlinears: Lack of Equivalence / Anicia del Corro 109

Interlinears: Lack of Equivalence*

Anicia del Corro**

1. Introduction

1.1. New interest

Greek Interlinear projects are becoming popular. By this, the Greek text of the NT is glossed with another language. In my context, Im aware of the Greek-Baluchi interlinear project in Pakistan published and dedicated in 1999. I now have a copy of the Greek-Bahasa Indonesia interlinear published in 2004. The Philippine Bible Society initiated a project in 2003 to produce a Greek-Tagalog interlinear and we hope to finish this project within this year.

In comparison with my early years with UBS, there were no interlinear projects then, at least, not in the NBSs where I served. What does this mean? There is a progression in the appreciation of Gods word. Our Bible users want

more than a translation. If in the past they were told how a verse is supposed to be understood, now, they want direct access to the biblical text, the source languages. They may not necessarily know how to translate from the source language, but they want to see the link between the source text and the translation at hand.

A part of this progression can be attributed to the growing interest in the study about the Bible, its history, different versions, translation principles and the like.

In a country where the majority religion is Islam, the accusation leveled against Christianity has been on the changing character of the Bible, considering that translations now even are available in contemporary, modern languages. This is in contrast with the Quran which is still read in its original language, Arabic. Without any knowledge of the principles of translation, it is hard to convince the layperson that Bible translations maintain the integrity of the original texts. Thus, an interlinear is a good format to give an idea about the accuracy of a

* United Bible Societies Asia-Pacific Area Translation Consultation Paper, April 2005.

** United Bible Societies Translation Consultant

110 17

translation. The Pakistan is on its second interlinear project, a means they have found effective to demonstrate the accuracy of the Bible in their Islamic context.

Equally interesting is looking into the reasons why Bible Society projects did not include interlinears in the past. Anyone who has majored in Biblical Studies will certainly remember how they were forbidden to use Hebrew and Greek interlinears in their exegesis class. And if students used interlinears, it was kept a secret, not only from the professor but from the other students as well. One thing is also true: the scholarly editions published by UBS do not include interlinears. It makes one wonder why there is so much bias against interlinears!

Interlinears are not perceived to be scholarly, and this may be due to the following reasons: An interlinear provides a fast way to match every Greek word with a gloss from the gloss language. The basis for the match is similarity in meaning without any regard for the structure of the gloss language. Because of this one-sided view of interlinears, it is easy to presume that assigning meanings can be quite arbitrary. All analysis is done only from the perspective of the source language when the ideal would have been to study both languages, source and gloss languages, as separate linguistic systems with their own grammars and unique characteristics.

1.2. Sample Greek-English Interlinears

For the purpose of comparison with existing interlinears, I evaluated the features of two Greek-English interlinears, The New Greek- English Interlinear New Testament, by Robert K. Brown and Philip W. Comfort, Illinois: Tyndale House Publishers, 1990, and The Interlinear NRSV- NIV Parallel New Testament in Greek and English by Alfred Marshall, Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House, 1993.

As expected, both interlinears provide a gloss in English that is a literal translation of the Greek word. Both also provide information about features of Greek grammar that do not have exact equivalents in English such as elaborate case features in nouns and adjectives, participles, negatives, and common idiomatic expressions.

There are also differences between the two interlinears. Brown and Comfort call the English counterpart as an interlinear translation. Instead of this term, Marshall

Interlinears: Lack of Equivalence / Anicia del Corro 111

calls it the interlinear English. This is an important distinction because it explains why the former includes the superscript numbers to indicate the order the words are to be read. This is to say that the interlinear part can and should be read like well-formed sentences.

I think Marshall is on the right track not to aim for a translation in the gloss. This explains why he does not use superscript numbers. However, the rationale is never explained and this is due to the common feature of these two interlinears to focus only on the description of Greek and not on the gloss language. Marshall demonstrates his in-depth knowledge of the Greek text, to the extent that some information is no longer relevant to the needs of the interlinear user, but rather to any person studying Greek. There is one setback. Marshall mentions in the introduction that the Greek text used is the 21st edition of Eberhard Nestle Novum Testamentum Graece. (Or should this be Erwin Nestles 1883-1972 since Eberhard Nestles period was 1851-1913?). On the other hand, Brown and Comfort used the UBS GNT 3rd edition (1983). The Greek text used in the Greek-Tagalog Interlinear is the 4th edition of the UBS Greek text.

1.3. Objective of the paper

This paper aims to present the theoretical considerations in the making of an

interlinear thereby elevating this practice from a one-sided study of the Greek language, to one that gives equal importance to the gloss language. As a result, the linguistic patterns of the two are viewed from the perspective of structure leading to a more objective, holistic and consistent description of the languages.

2. Differences between Greek and Tagalog

2.1. Genetic classification

One way to classify languages is to establish families whose members are said to

have developed historically from a common ancestor. The basis for this kind of diachronic classification is the regular correspondence of sounds. The existence of systematic phonetic correspondences in the forms of two or more languages point toward a common source. Consider the following example 1):

1) OGrady, William, Michael Dobrovolsky, and Mark Aronoff, Contemporary Linguistics (New York:

Bedford/St. Martins, 1995), 324.

112 17

English Russian Hindi Turkishtwo dva do ikithree tri tin ytbrother brat bh kardenose nos nah burun

It is notable to see the closer similarity between English and Russian when

compared with Hindi. Turkish, not related to the rest, is included to show the non-existence of cognates. Based on this type of classification, the Greek language belongs to the Indo-European family of languages, under the sub-family Hellenic. On the other hand, Tagalog belongs to the Austronesian family, under the Malayo-Polynesian branch.

2.2. Typological Classification

Another way to classify languages, but from a synchronic perspective, is through their structural characteristics. Different languages combine morphemes differently in forming words. In isolating or analytic languages, words are generally single root morphemes, such as Chinese. In agglutinating languages, words can contain several morphemes but the components are usually easily identified. In fusional or inflectional languages, words may contain different morphemes but affixes mark several grammatical categories simultaneously.

Greek is inflectional so in the Greek word , the final vowel can signify any of the following grammatical categories: present tense/aspect, active voice, indicative mood, 1st person and singular number. One will note the extensive semantic load of the omega of this verb.

On the other hand, Tagalog is an agglutinating language because the word is easily divided into its component parts, thus:

nagtulungan < n ag tulong an helped each other Completed aspect active help reciprocal

2.3. Contrastive Analysis of languages:

In the development of Philippine linguistics, specifically, the use of linguistic principles in the study of Philippine languages, there was a stage in the 70s when contrastive analyses were very popular. These are comparative studies of the

Interlinears: Lack of Equivalence / Anicia del Corro 113

linguistic features of English and another Philippine language, many times with the objective to improve the teaching and use of the English language. The other language was analyzed only in so far that it was different from English. But as a result, the language being compared with English ended up being analyzed.

Following this type of analysis, a survey of the different parts of a Greek grammar book can easily show the major differences between Greek and Tagalog. A number of differences show categories grammaticalized in Greek whereas these are lexicalized in Tagalog. Something is said to be grammaticalized if a concept is expressed through a regular and structural alternation such as affixes. When the concept is encoded as separate words that do not exhibit a regular alternation, the category is said to be lexicalized. Please see under Reflexive for a clear distinction between these two.

Order of basic componentso Greek: VSOo Tagalog: VOS

concord or agreement o Greek grammaticalized through suffixes affecting articles, nouns,

pronouns, verbs, adjectives, adverbs o Tagalog none

Case markingo Greek grammaticalized through suffixeso Tagalog grammaticalized through different markers

Verbalso Greek participles and infinitives grammaticalzedo Tagalog expressed as verbs usually, lexicalized

Verbso Greek phonologically conditioned classification such as liquid,

- , contract verbso Tagalog elaborate semantically differentiated affix combinations

Subjunctiveo Greek grammaticalizedo Tagalog - lexicalized

Nounso Greek elaborate declensiono Tagalog none

114 17

Prepositionso Greek high differentiationo Tagalog low differentiation

Reflexiveo Greek grammaticalized in pronouns

Mark 5:5 . Bruising himself with stones

o Tagalog lexicalizedMark 5:5 .

sinusugatan ang sarili ng mga bato In Greek, the reflexive pronoun is inflected for case, number and gender.

The regular alternation marks that it is grammaticalized. In Tagalog, reflexive action is expressed lexically through the use of sarili meaning self, and not through a grammatical alternation.

2.3.1. Concord

One morpho-syntactic characteristic of the Greek language that stands out as different from Tagalog is the prevalence of concord. This is a syntactic device manifested by the agreement of suffixes between nouns, pronouns, adjectives, articles and participles in the categories of case, gender, number.

Mark 7:3

, ,

Note the agreement between , , , where the shared final vowels are also obvious. Although not as obvious in form, the adjective also agrees with the nouns in case, number and gender. The verbs have to agree with the nouns they modify in number and person. Thus, the verb agrees with the plural subject and . Because of the prevalent suffixes showing agreement, there is more freedom in the way words are arranged. Because of the semantic load of these words, it is not surprising that Blass et al2) observe that

2) Blass, F., A. Debrunner, and Robert Funk, A Greek Grammar of the New Testament and other early

Christian Literature (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1961), 248.

Interlinears: Lack of Equivalence / Anicia del Corro 115

word order in Greek and so in the NT is freer by far than in modern languages. Certain tendencies and habits on word order (in the NT especially in the narrative) are observed by Blass et al and these are

1. The verb or the nominal predicate with its copula stands immediately after

the conjunction (the usual beginning of a sentence) then follow in order the subject, object, supplementary participle, etc.

2. Positions are by no means mandatory. Any emphasis on an element in the sentence causes that element to be moved forward.

3. Transitional temporal phrases tend to stand at the beginning; but sometimes as a result of the tendency to begin a sentence with a verb, a meaningless meaningless which does not even influence the construction may precede.

The second and third statements, Blass3) admits the lack of a big picture with

regard to how words are arranged in Greek. The first description is often made that the verb takes precedence in Greek. There is some truth to this but one has to equally emphasize that for every verb, the grammatical categories referring to the subject are always present. So this statement is not too significant especially when the subject is a pronoun. When the subject is a noun, it may occur before the verb. With the copula, it may be before or after. But with the emphatic proclitic pronoun, it is always before the verb.

So the most significant thing to be made about word order is that it is quite free and this is a result of the highly inflectional feature of Greek. One can move words around more easily if the words are themselves bearers of meaning and this is true for inflectional languages. In isolating languages where every significant category of meaning is represented by a separate morpheme, word order is used as basis for meaning distinction

Tagalog is basically a Verb Object Subject language. Being agglutinative, meaning distinction is borne by distinct affixes and syntactic marking particles. There is no morphological concord.

2.3.2. Voice

Voice is a grammatical category that shows how one part or entity is related to the

3) Ibid., 248.

116 17

action or main predication in the sentence. If the doer of the action is also the subject, the voice is active. However, if the subject is other than the doer of the action, the voice is passive. The Greek language clearly delineates between these two.

Three examples are given below which may not contain the whole verse. In the first two, Matt 1:2 and 14:58, the Greek verb is active. In Mark 14:72, the Greek verb is middle deponent and should still be translated as active. In all of these three cases, however, the active voice is not possible in Tagalog, without a change in the meaning.

Matt 1:2 , Abraham begat Isaac* si Abraham nanganak/umanak kay Isaac (active) Ni Abraham naging anak si Isaac (passive)

Mark 14:58

we heard him saying* kami nakinig sa kanya sinasabi (active) Namin narinig niya sinasabi (passive)

The sentence above can become acceptable if made to mean we listened to him saying, thus intransitive.

Mark 14:72

you will deny me three timesbeses tatlo ako ipagkakaila mo (passive)times three me will deny you* beses tatlo sa akin magkakaila ka (active)

The Tagalog sentence above can become acceptable if made to mean he will lie, thus intransitive.

2.3.3. Primacy of the patient

In the three examples above, the syntactic behavior of arguments or accompanying noun phrases shows a particular relationship between the transitive

Interlinears: Lack of Equivalence / Anicia del Corro 117

and intransitive sentences. The subject of an intransitive verb such as magkakaila ka (subject) sa akin meaning you will deny me in Mark 14:72 is marked the same as the patient of a transitive clause (ako me) which is different from the marker of the cooccurring agent (mo you).4)

This syntactic behavior has been associated with ergativity when some verbs show restriction in occurring in the active voice. Studies in Philippine linguistics have attributed this to the primacy of the patient (object or goal) being the more salient nominal in Tagalog5). Patient focus constructions are also observed in verbs that bear no affix. When one of two nominals is forced to be focused, the patient readily allows it. Some examples in Tagalog are: ayaw dont like; kailangan necessary; alam know.

The same is observed in verbs derived from nouns in which the cooccurring agent noun appears to have been incorporated into the verb, or sometimes called a cognate verb. Matt 1:2 example *umanak give birth to a child and anak is child. Similar examples are: anayin to be infested with termites anay termites; lamukin means to be bitten by mosquitos where lamok means mosquitos.

This section presents the major issues of difference between Greek and Tagalog: genetic classification, typological classification, the prevalence of concord in Greek and the ergative tendencies of Tagalog. Because of this tendency, an active verb in Greek is sometimes impossible and sometimes very unnatural to render as active also in Tagalog.

3. Principles to be used in the interlinear:

3.1. The lack of equivalence

Equivalence in this paper is used to refer to the close similarity between languages because of their common descent. This was shown in the close phonetic correspondence between English, Russian and Hindi in section 2.1 The basis for the similarity is the fact that the languages belong to the same family.

Among Philippine languages, shared morpho-syntactic characteristics can also be

4) ka and ako belong to the same syntactic set of pronouns in Tagalog.

5) De Guzman, Videa, The ergative analysis: A different view of structure (Diliman Quezon City:

Lecture at the University of the Philippines, 1998).

118 17

the basis for equivalence. One can note the similarity of the syntactic markers in 5 Philippine languages below.

A: Tagalog Bumili ang bata ng libro. Bought the child mrk6) book

Cebuano mipalit ug libro ang bata Bought mrk book the child

Hiligaynon nagbakal ang bata sang libro Bought the child mrk book

Consider, however, the languages in B:

B. Kapampangan sinali yang libru ing anak Bought he/she+mrk book the child

Ilocano gimmatang ti ubing ti libro Bought the child mrk book

All these sentences mean, The child bought a book. in 5 languages in the Philippines. Among these, languages in A are closer structurally than those in B. In A, note that except for a difference in order of words, the gloss of the words is identical. In B however, note the need for a cross-referent pronoun in Kapampangan, to refer to the child. In Ilocano, note the use of the identical marker for the subject child and the direct object book. The degree of similarity can differ as in A and B, but their similarity typologically is easily established.

If equivalence is based on inherent similarities between related languages, both genetically and typologically, and if Greek and Tagalog are clearly of different types on both counts, as shown in section 2.0, what can be the basis to make an interlinear with Tagalog as the gloss language?

3.2. A correspondence, but not equivalence

6) Syntactic marker.

Interlinears: Lack of Equivalence / Anicia del Corro 119

There may be a lack of equivalence, but one can establish a correspondence. The fact that there are numerous interlinears with Greek as the SL and many languages as GL (Bahasa Indonesia, Baluchi) is a proof that despite the lack of equivalence, there is value in showing correspondence in an interlinear. The user usually wants to have an idea about the literal meaning of the Greek word, but first the correspondence has to be established. The weakness of existing interlinears is that only the SL is given importance. No wonder, assigning the gloss is arbitrary because there is no reference whatsoever to the structure or linguistic patterns of the GL. It is like a patchwork, the GL patching up for whatever is found in the SL. Glossing will cease to be arbitrary only if the structure of the GL is given the same importance as the SL and the principles of glossing are based on sound linguistic principles and therefore shows consistency.

3.2.1. The verb and Tagalog ay

The Greek verb is a copula verb characteristic of many languages in the Indo-European family of languages which is not found in Tagalog. Although used often to indicate a state of being, it can also combine with a participle to form a periphrastic construction. Either way, this copula verb embodies a combination of grammatical categories such as tense/aspect, mood, gender and person.

Tagalog ay has been wrongfully analyzed as equivalent to the verb to be. But ay does not exhibit any verbal quality except to order the components, always putting the subject before it and the predicate after it. There are times when Greek also behaves this way. Because of s grammatical load such as person and number, there will be times when ay will be glossed with a pronoun. Clearly, there is no equivalence, but a correspondence can be established.

Mark 1:11

You are the son my the belovedIkaw ay ang anak ko ang minamahal

Mark 1:13

and was at the desert forty daysat siya ay nasa sa ilang apatnapu mga araw

120 17

3.3. The gloss is not intended to be read as a translation.

By virtue of the principle above, that what is to be maintained is a correspondence rather than equivalence, the gloss should not be read as a translation. Therefore, it will not read as a well-formed sequence of words but it should be possible to glean the meaning even just from the corresponding words of the SL. Quite differently, as mentioned in section 1.2, some existing Greek-English interlinears are intended to be read as translations by the system of superscript numbers on the English words to indicate the order how they are to be read Such treatment of the GL clearly demonstrates the corresponding words of the GL being pulled from all directions for the sake of finding a word to correspond to the SL. Correspondence is made only on the surface level.

The following is an example from Brown and Comfort (1990):

Mark 1:13

and he had been 4in 5the 6wilderness 7forty 8daysat siya ay nasa sa ilang apatnapu mga araw

1tempted 2by - 3Satantinutukso ni Satanas

3.3.1. No ligature in Tagalog

The Tagalog ligature is the morpheme that is added to link words within a descriptive phrase, whether adjectival or adverbial This ligature is phonologically conditioned: /na/ when preceded by a word ending with a consonant, // as in the example above in Mark 1:13.

forty daysapatnapu mga araw (gloss)

Interlinears: Lack of Equivalence / Anicia del Corro 121

In a well-formed level, this phrase is: apatnapu mga araw

If the order of the constituents of the descriptive phrase are reversed: Mga araw na apatnapu Days linker forty

The linker takes the form of /na/ in the latter example because it now follows a word that ends with a semi-vowel /w/. Because of the phonological conditioning, the linker apparently makes the flow of speech smooth. And because of principle 2 that states that the gloss is not intented to be read as a translation, the ligature will not be added in the gloss. This supports the position that an interlinear is not a surface structure representation but rather a stage prior to it. The only time when a linker will be used is when a descriptive phrase forms the gloss of one Greek words such as:

fortyapat + na + pufour lnk ten

3.4. Accompanying Translation

The Greek-Tagalog Interlinear recognizes the need to show a coherent, grammatical rendering of the glosses through the accompanying translation on the same page. This is the Bagong Ang Biblia7), or Revised Ang Biblia (RAB), a formal translation of the Bible in Tagalog. The gloss will fulfill the purpose of providing the literal meaning while RAB provides the smooth reading of the gloss language.

The RAB is a revision of the 1905 Ang Biblia, while maintaining the same formal correspondence approach. As a revision, the language was adjusted to make it more readable. Consequently, the very archaic words were revised to make them more understandable and for the same reason, the very formal approach was in

7) RAB, 2001.

122 17

some places revised to reflect meaning rather than the form. For these reasons, it is not surprising to see how RAB has deviated from the gloss of the interlinear. However, when RAB still reflects the literal gloss, priority is given to the choice of lexicon used in RAB. An example is the Greek word or . The 1905 Ang Biblia consistently translated as narito meaning here it is. RAB sometimes used a more contextual rendering such as Mark 15:35:

Mark 1:2

Behold I send the messenger of meNarito nagsusugo ako ng sugo akin

Mark 15:35

Look for Elijah he callsTingnan ninyo kay Elias tumatawag siyaLook you (pl) to Elijah calling he

3.5. When even Correspondence is difficult

Section 2.3 lists down the different categories in language where Greek and Tagalog greatly differ. Most of these involve grammatical categories in Greek but which are lexicalized in Tagalog. Two of the more difficult ones are the participles and subjunctive. Because of the lack of equivalence, it is expected that there will be more inconsistency in the way the verbal participle and the subjunctive verb are glossed.

Mark 9:14

and when they came to the disciplesThe participle can be glossed in two ways: a) nang dumating sila sa mga alagad when came (act) they to disciples

b) pagdating nila sa mga alagad when/after coming (pas) they to the disciples

Interlinears: Lack of Equivalence / Anicia del Corro 123

This participle can be glossed in these two ways. Example A retains the active voice in Tagalog but needs to add an adverbial nang which is not found in Greek. In B, one word gloss is retained in Tagalog but the voice is changed.

Mark 12:2 to get from them

some of the fruit of the vineyard

The subjunctive, aorist active 3rd singular verb is glossed as makakuha meaning be able to get/receive to reflect the contingency meaning more than the tense/aspect aorist since in the subjunctive, nature of action is given more importance than time. In some cases however, the subjunctive meaning is not reflected as in:

Mark 11:28 ; and who gave

you this authority to do them?

In Tagalog, the subjunctive present active 2nd sg verb is glossed as a simple gawin meaning to do, which is no different in form and meaning from the indicative verb .

4. Summary

The assumption of equivalence is apparent in the very format of an interlinear. But many times, there is no equivalence. Consequently, the making of interlinears involve a number of theoretical considerations.

There is no better substitute to learning a language as one language with its own grammar and unique features. However, the reality is that people do not always have this opportunity since this entails more time and focus. The impression sometimes is that a person only needs to have an "idea" of what's happening in the other language. I believe, this has led to the proliferation of interlinears. So, this paper recognizes that there is value in making an interlinear because it provides a quick correspondence between two languages, namely the one being studied such as Greek, and the one that is known by the user, such as English or Tagalog. The

124 17

inadequacy, however, is that the gloss language is not given proper treatment. I believe that an interlinear's analysis of the two languages is useful to know how the two language systems relate with one another. As the two languages retain their uniqueness, the goal is still to find a correspondence between them. The picture is of two linguistic systems being rearranged and readjusted to find a systematic correspondence between them. Because of the reality of the two unique systems, two principles are necessary. First, it is important to establish equivalence, if there is a close affinity between the two languages. If not, which is usually the case in interlinears, the pattern of correspondence should be analyzed. Secondly, because of the lack of equivalence, the gloss is not to be read as a translation. The two linguistic systems will vary in numerous aspects and this principle will allow flexibility in the gloss language to shed light on the meaning of the source language. However, because the interlinear involves two linguistic systems, consistency in the gloss is given high priority. For Greek and Tagalog, a number of syntactic categories in Greek are lexicalized in Tagalog. The manner of expression may be different, but what is significant is that the same general idea can still be expressed.

This type of interlinear will include a brief grammatical sketch of the two languages, the source and gloss languages, that is user friendly to the target audience. This will be provided in the actual product but not in this paper. Very important to the final product is the introduction that will explain how the user can make good use of the interlinear, the principles integrated, with the use of minimal technicality.

Appendix: Sample of Mark 1:1-8 in a Greek-Tagalog interlinear format

* KeywordInterlinears, gloss language, Tagalog, equivalence, correspondence.

Interlinears: Lack of Equivalence / Anicia del Corro

Sample Greek-Tagalog Interlinear: Mark 1:1-87)

Mark 1:1 .

N-NF-S DGNS N-GN-S N-GM-S N-GM-S N-GM-S N-GM-S[THE] BEGINNING OF THE GOOD NEWS OF JESUS CHRIST [THE] SON OF GOD.PASIMULA NG EBANGHELYO NI JESU- CRISTO [ANAK NG DIYOS]

Mark 1:2 , CS VIRP--3S PD DDMS N-DM-S DDMS N-DM-S QSST AS IT HAS BEEN WRITTEN IN - ISAIAH THE PROPHET, BEHOLDTULAD NG NASUSULAT NASA SA ISAIAS NA PROPETA NARITO

, VIPA--1S DAMS N-AM-S NPG-1S PG N-GN-S NPG-2S APRNM-SI SEND THE MESSENGER OF ME BEFORE [THE] FACE OF YOU, WHONAGPAPADALA AKO NG SUGO KO UNAHAN MUKHA MO NA

7) The grammatical description uses the analysis and symbols from Friberg 1981.

17

?VIFA--3S DAFS N-AF-S NPG-2SWILL PREPARE THE WAY OF YOU;MAGHAHANDA NG DAAN MO

Mark 1:3 , N-NF-S VPPAGM-S PD DDFS AP-DF-S VMAA--2P DAFS N-AF-SA VOICE CRYING OUT IN THE WILDERNESS, PREPARE THE WAYTINIG NG SUMISIGAW NASA SA ILANG IHANDA NINYO ANG DAAN

, ,N-GM-S A--AF-P VMPA--2P DAFP N-AF-P NPGM3SOF [THE] LORD, STRAIGHT MAKE THE PATHS OF HIM, NG PANGNOON TUWID GAWIN NINYO ANG MGA LANDAS NIYA

Mark 1:4 VIAD--3S N-NM-S DNMS+ VPPANM-S PD DDFS AP-DF-S CCCAME JOHN - BAPTIZING IN THE WILDERNESS ANDDUMATING JUAN ANG TAGAPAGBAUTISMO SA - ILANG AT

Interlinears: Lack of Equivalence / Anicia del Corro

.VPPANM-S N-AN-S N-GF-S PA N-AF-S N-GF-PPREACHING A BAPTISM OF REPENTANCE FOR [THE] FORGIVENESS OF SINS.NANGANGARAL NG BAUTISMO NG PAGSISISI PARA SA KAPATAWARAN NG MGA kasalanan

Mark 1:5 CH VIIN--3S PA NPAM3S A--NF-S DNFS A--NF-S N-NF-SAND WERE GOING OUT TO HIM [THE] ENTIRE - JUDEAN COUNTRYAT PUMUPUNTA SA KANYA LAHAT ANG JUDEA LUPAIN

, CC DNMP N-NM-P A--NM-P CC VIIP--3P PGAND THE JERUSALEMITES ALL, AND THEY WERE BEING BAPTIZED BYAT ANG MGA TAGA-JERUSALEM LAHAT AT BINABAUTISMUHAN SILA -

NPGM3S PD DDMS N-DM-S N-DM-S VPPMNM-P DAFP N-AF-PHIM IN THE JORDAN RIVER, CONFESSING THE SINSNIYA SA - JORDAN ILOG NAGPAPAHAYAG NG MGA KASALANAN NILA

17

.NPGM3POF THEM.NILA

Mark 1:6 CS VIIA--3S+ DNMS N-NM-S +VPRMNM-S N-AF-P N-GF-S CCAND HAD BEEN - JOHN CLOTHED HAIRS [IN] CAMEL ANDAT NOON AY SI JUAN NAKADAMIT NG BALAHIBO NG KAMELYO AT

N-AF-S A--AF-S PA DAFS N-AF-S NPGM3S CC +VPPANM-SBELT A LEATHER AROUND THE WAIST OF HIM, AND EATINGNG SINTURON BALAT SA PALIBOT NG BAYWANG NIYA AT KUMAKAIN

.N-AF-P CC N-AN-S A--AN-SLOCUSTS AND HONEY WILD.NG MGA BALANG AT PUKYUTAN LIGAW

Interlinears: Lack of Equivalence / Anicia del Corro

Mark 1:7 , CC/CH VIIA--3S VPPANM-S VIPN--3S DNMS APMNM-SAND HE WAS PREACHING SAYING, IS COMING THE ONE STRONGERAT NANGANGARAL SIYA NAGSASABI DUMARATING ANG HIGIT NA MAKAPANGYARIHAN KAYSA

, NPG-1S PG NPG-1S APRGM-S QN VIPA--1S A--NM-S VPAANM1STHAN ME, AFTER ME, OF WHOM NOT I AM QUALIFIED, STOOPING,AKIN KASUNOD KO NA HINDI AKO KARAPAT-DAPAT YUMUKOD

.VNAA DAMS N-AM-S DGNP N-GN-P NPGM3STO UNTIE THE STRAP OF THE SANDALS OF HIM.MAGKALAG NG TALI NG MGA SANDALYAS NIYA

Mark 1:8 , NPN-1S VIAA--1S NPA-2P N-DN-S NPNM3S CH VIFA--3S I BAPTIZED YOU IN WATER, HE BUT WILL BAPTIZE AKO NAGBAUTISMO AKO SA INYO SA TUBIG SIYA NGUNIT MAGBABAUTISMO SIYA

17

.NPA-2P PD N-DN-S A--DN-SYOU IN SPIRIT [THE] HOLY.SA INYO SA ESPIRITU SANTO

Interlinears: Lack of Equivalence / Anicia del Corro 131

* References Blass, F. and A. Debrunner and Robert Funk, A Greek Grammar of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1961.Brown, Robert and Philip Comfort, The New Greek-English Interlinear New

Testament, Illinois: Tyndale House Publishers, 1990.De Guzman, Videa, The ergative analysis: A different view of structure, Diliman

Quezon City: Lecture at the University of the Philippines, 1998.Friberg, Barbara and Timothy Friberg eds., Analytical Greek New Testament, Grand

Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1981. Greek - Baluchi Interlinear, Karachi: Pakistan Bible Society, 1999.Marshall, Alfred, The Interlinear NRSV-NIV Parallel New Testament in Greek and

English, Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1993.OGrady, William and Michael Dobrovolsky and Mark Aronoff, Contemporary

Linguistics, New York: Bedford/St. Martins, 1995.PBIK Jilid I: Perjanjian baru Interlinear: YunaniIndonesia Jakarta: Lembaga

Alkitab Indonesia, 2004.Schacter, Paul and Fe Otanes, Tagalog Reference Grammar, Los Angeles:

University of California Press, 1972.

132 17

:

( )

: , (source language) (gloss language) .

. .

. . , , . .

. , . , . . , . , . . .

.

Interlinears : Lack of Equivalence1. Introduction2. Differences between Greek and Tagalog3. Principles to be used in the interlinear:4. SummaryReferencesAbstract